The study “Demystifying multilingual LIS journals in Scopus” by Eungi Kim, based in the department of library and information science at Keimyung University in South Korea, highlights the limited representation of multilingual Library and Information Science (LIS) journals in major academic indexes, particularly Scopus.
Kim’s research reveals that only 17% of indexed LIS journals are multilingual, underscoring the dominance of English-only publications in academic rankings and databases. This English-centric approach creates barriers for non-English-speaking researchers and hinders the visibility of their work. Kim proposes that establishing an alternative multilingual index could promote inclusivity, enhance open science by diversifying accessible knowledge, and foster greater recognition of multilingual scholarship across academic disciplines.
The study also examines the structural biases in global indexing practices, which often favor English-language journals for metrics and visibility. Although multilingual journals cater to broader audiences and reflect cultural diversity, they typically rank lower in international databases, which limits their citations and academic impact. Most multilingual LIS journals are published in Europe and Latin America, particularly in Spain and Brazil, where languages like Spanish and Portuguese dominate. This regional concentration suggests that cultural and linguistic diversity within academic publishing could expand if institutional and commercial support were directed towards multilingual and non-English journals. Analysts point out that the global emphasis on English-language publishing marginalizes non-English journals, which diminishes diversity and fails to capture knowledge from the Global South.
Supporters of multilingual open science, such as Dr. Alexandre López-Borrull, an associate professor in the faculty of information and communication sciences at the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC) in Spain, advocate for a multilingual index to overcome the language bias in global rankings and databases. Such an index could improve inclusivity, allowing diverse linguistic communities to contribute to and benefit from global research.
According to David Mills, director of Oxford University’s Centre for Global Higher Education in the United Kingdom, there are now many alternative, more inclusive, indexes that the scholarly community could now use, such as the not-for-profit OpenAlex, which has three times as many works as Scopus and Web of Science.
Suggestions for enhancing open science include increasing support for translations, diversifying peer-review processes to handle multilingual submissions, and encouraging partnerships among universities and publishers. These efforts, along with regional initiatives, could strengthen multilingual publishing ecosystems and enable equitable access to academic knowledge. This shift could foster a more collaborative, inclusive, and culturally diverse scientific community, where language diversity is considered an asset rather than a limitation.
More information:
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20241031123220298&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GLNL0807